Re: operator exclusion constraints

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Davis
Тема Re: operator exclusion constraints
Дата
Msg-id 1257534688.28470.215.camel@monkey-cat.sm.truviso.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: operator exclusion constraints  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Ответы Re: operator exclusion constraints
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 10:50 -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> Is your objection to EXCLUDE for cases when there is no USING clause?
> 
>      EXLUDE (room, during) BY (=, &&)
> 

"Objection" is too strong a word. EXCLUDE is a transitive verb, so it's
slightly confusing in the above case.

> BTW, is it the case that room maps to = and during maps to && in this  
> example? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to combine them?
> 
>      EXCLUSION (room WITH =, during WITH &&)

That's (close to) the current syntax, which I'm perfectly fine with.
Form 1 with EXCLUSION/CHECK WITH is the current syntax.

It seemed like the winds were shifting towards separating them, but I'm
happy leaving it alone.

Regards,Jeff Davis



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: plperl and inline functions -- first draft
Следующее
От: Jeff Davis
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: operator exclusion constraints